Sunday’s peaceful march in Hong Kong marked the 11th consecutive week of protests in the territory.
Large Union Jack flags have become a regular fixture of the marches: One was even unfurled inside the Hong Kong Legislative Council chamber after protesters occupied it on July 1. Some commentators have projected that many Hong Kongers cleave tightly to “British values” of democracy, the rule of law and a sense of fair play, which are being eroded by Beijing.
However, there may be an altogether more simple motivation for brandishing the flags: Protesters want to remind Britain’s politicians — and the wider world — that the UK government has a moral duty and a legal obligation to intervene and stand up for the rights of its former colonial subjects.
The Sino-British Joint Declaration was signed on Dec. 19, 1984, by then-British prime minister Margaret Thatcher and then-Chinese premier Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽) and registered at the UN the following year.
China promised it would guarantee Hong Kong’s system of government and independent judiciary, as set out in the Basic Law — Hong Kong’s “mini-constitution” — would remain intact for 50 years following the handover in 1997. The protesters are acutely aware of the promises and are determined to hold Beijing and the territory’s government to account.
During the past 11 weeks, the protest movement has morphed from opposition to a now-suspended extradition bill, into five specific demands: withdrawal of the bill, the release of arrested protesters, withdrawal of the classification of a June 12 protest as a “riot,” an independent inquiry into police behavior and the implementation of universal suffrage.
It is this final demand — for free elections — a robust reaffirmation of 2014’s “Umbrella movement,” which is the most significant.
Article 45 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law places an obligation on China to implement “selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures,” while Article 68 states that the “ultimate aim is the election of all the members of the Legislative Council by universal suffrage.”
Therefore, China has a clear obligation under international law to implement universal suffrage, yet has done everything in its power to obstruct this process.
British politicians and diplomats have, on the whole, been cautious in their criticism of Beijing’s meddling in Hong Kong, probably concerned about the potential for diplomatic blowback and damage to Chinese investment in the UK’s post-Brexit economy.
Unfortunately, as with all bullies, the passivity and appeasement has simply emboldened Beijing.
In November 2014, a committee of UK parliamentarians were told they would be denied entry to Hong Kong for a trip that was to be part of an inquiry into the territory’s relations with the UK 30 years after the joint declaration.
A Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman in 2017 told reporters: “Now Hong Kong has returned to the motherland’s embrace for 20 years, the Sino-British Joint Declaration, as a historical document, no longer has any practical significance, and it is not at all binding for the central government’s management over Hong Kong.”
Last week, Chinese Ambassador to Britain Liu Xiaoming (劉曉明) accused Britain of interfering in Hong Kong’s affairs.
It is not a question of interference. The UK has a clear legal obligation — as do all UN member states — to ensure that China respects international law.
After the sycophancy toward China’s leadership emblematic of former British prime minister David Cameron’s terms in office, and three years of near-paralysis under his successor, Theresa May, Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new government must provide some fresh thinking on Hong Kong.
Britain has a clear moral and legal duty to “interfere.”
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under